Main menu

Secondary menu

You are here

Guanxi, miànzi, and Garlic Number Theory aka Guanxi Ontology

Infinite /Finite correlates to one and the many.
Difference correlates to Existence, and Identity correlates to Life. In that
Difference anchors Identity, and Identity is not a necessary attribute of
Difference, logical relations anchor mathematical relations in much the same
way. But this is not to say that it is possible to talk about Difference
(Existence) without inherent reference to Identity (Life) or logic without
inherent reference to mathematics. The two aspects of any given moment (of a
'whatness') are inseparable and yet separate. Garlic argues that this
Difference / Identity relation is what Aristotle meant by A=A, and also that
this is the nature of the field where and when quantum mechanics exists as a
"whatness" (or presentation), if only as an illusion…but 'where' and
'when' (the thereness) does the 'whatness' of quantum mechanics live? Perhaps
this is the flummoxing problem that seems to overshadow Quantum physics. Garlic
is not flummoxed because Garlic 'is' an answer.

The other thing to keep in mind is that Garlic
defines numbers as “vehicles of deliverance into the now” or “nowing vehicles
of delivery,” a definition that falls in line with Pythagoras’ definition of
numbers.(1)

Garlic chose to use the terms “guanxi” (关系) and “face” (面子, miànzi/mien-tzu) because their
meanings tend to embody Difference / Identity and any and all the duality of
thereness, in the absolute sense of wholeness, in the living experience thereof
and therein.Difference, like guanxi,
defines itself in relationships, which is “living experiencing”, as
presentation (or appearance or miànzi), and both aspects (Infinite /Finite) of
such thereness of presentation are bound in illusions defined by the
strong/weak states of Difference / Identity to Difference / Identity (or guanxi
/ miànzi to guanxi / miànzi) —as it is in the duality of Difference / Identity
of thereness itself.(2)

In Garlic numbers or Guanxi Ontology, the Difference
/ Identity relationship is still acknowledged in numbers but with the
existential center of numbers, Difference, still being recognized as the
“anchoring center” (see footnote for Pythagoras’ definition of numbers).We, in our current states of Individuality,
believe numerical therenesses (or essences) to be defined in their Identities
without Difference—and, thus, as “objects” without an anchoring center.For example, “5” has a value that correlates
to the sum of “3” and “2:For “5”, as
it is for “2” and “3”, embodies an absolute “-stance” that, because we no
longer are even capable of recognizing its Difference “sub-stance” (or
anchoring center or essence), the Identity holds and defines absolute
value...but it’s a value, to quote Nietzsche, “that has no place of
shine.”It is a value that now searches
or moves along the linear line—-a “life” without an anchoring center—-toward
absolution:The actual “nowing”, living
moment of the number, as it is of the essential, is always categorically
absent.(3) (If I recall correctly it was Bertrand Russel who would later apply
a “zero” bracket to the “Identity”, thus enabling numbers to continue on,
existence-free, without an anchoring center or Difference,and, consequently, to
no longer be the “Pythagorean seedling monad” to all that is and could ever
be.)But “5” (or “3” or “2” for that
matter) has a substance or a Difference existence that doesn’t necessarily
correspond to its “Identity” value of “5”:Every number is, as a natural, primary essence, an original “seedling
monad” and is, therefore, indistinguishable from all other numbers.The “Difference” essence (monad) is primary
to the Identity:Numbers, in Guanxi
Ontology, are not “objects” but vehicles of deliverance, and, thus, their
presentation (appearance or miànzi) never deny their anchoring Difference
dynamic. To do so, to live without an origin or anchoring center, only leads
living into an abyss.

Numbers have lost their anchoring center with the
rise of Cartesian/post-Cartesian algebra.The word algebra, correspondingly, comes from, as I recently refreshed
my memory of its definition at the website Multi Sense Realism (4),the Arabic “al-jebr”, and means “reunion of
broken parts.”Seeing that algebra, in
the era of Descartes, was lineated through, as Garlic argues, the collapse of
Difference into the Identity as presented in “symbolic representation” or an
“objective state”—-as a direct result or reflection of the idea of “self” as
found in “one’s” ability to doubt,
i.e. cogito ergo sum—“algebra” has thus been reinvented, in a historical
dialogue, to mean “the destruction of the broken parts”:“One’s mind is no longer delivered by
numbers, but now numbers are synthesized by one’s mind….one, as in an Identity
sans Difference. Mind/Body dualism.

Garlic numbers like any and all other “things”, when
revealed in their dual natures of Identity / Difference, have the possibility
of having a Difference that can be strong (nearing the Infinite “power” of
presence or miànzi) with a strong, harmoniously nearing the infinite power of
presence (miànzi) or a weak, nearing the finite dyadic fragility of miànzi (see
“dyad” below) presence (miànzi)—-or somewhere there in between—-or they can
have weak Difference with either a strong (there again nearing the infinite
power of presence or miànzi) or a weak (nearing the finite dyadic fragility of)
presence (miànzi)-—or somewhere there in between. Garlic numbers always
recognize the Difference (Infinite / Finite) as the grounding vehicles of
deliverance to the Identity. “5”, for example, in its “5” deliverance remains
truer to deliverance when all Difference is “present”; thus, “5’s” Difference
value is “strong” and can support an “Identity” with “living dynamic” or
“living deliverance”.

Footnotes

(1) “Believing that nothing exists without a center
(everything exists with a center), mathematical philosophers started with a
point and drew a circle around it. This symbol is called the monad and
represents the number one. This figure is the most stable, and the mathematical
philosophers also called it The First, The Essence, The Foundation, and Unity.
Pythagoras believed the monad to be god and the good. The monad is origin of
the One. The monad is the seed of a tree for which the numbers are to the monad
as what the branches of a tree are to the seed of a tree. The monad in relation
to other numbers preserves the identity of every other number or anything it
encounters. Any number multiplied by one is itself, and any number divided by
one is itself.” (Pythagoras and the Mystery of Numbers,
http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/EMAT6680Fa06/Hobgood/Pythagoras.html)

(2) “The Pytahgoreans believed that nothing exists
without a venter around which it revolves. The center is the source and it is
beyond understanding, it is unknowable, but like a seed, the center will expand
and will fulfill itself as a circle.” (Pythagoras and the Mystery of Numbers,)
In regards to the duality of Difference / Identity thereness itself (numbers),
their “bound in illusions” existence is a play in the balancing act, as it is
Life living, between center and circumference. http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/EMAT6680Fa06/Hobgood/Pythagoras.html)

(3) "The dyad involves the principles of
'twoness' or 'otherness'. Greek philosophers referred to the dyad as “audacity”
because of the boldness of separation from the one, and 'anguish' because there
is still a sense of tension of a desire to return to oneness. They believed
that the dyad divides and unites, repels and attracts, separates and returns.
'Pythagoras held that one of the first principles, the monad, is god and the
good, which is the origin of the One, and is itself intelligence; but the undefined
dyad is a deity and the evil, surrounding which is the mass of matter' (Aet. 1.
7; Dox. 302). The dyad is the door between the One and the Many. Recall the
symbolic figure of the vesica piscis. The vesica piscis is a passageway to the
journey of spiritual self discovery. The notion of fertility is associated with
its vulva shape, and is thus related to the passage of birth.” (Pythagoras and
the Mystery of Numbers,
http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/EMAT6680Fa06/Hobgood/Pythagoras.html)

Unfortunately in our Zeitgeist, the “oneness” has
become a “unique yet universal machine of self-discovery through shopping.” As
for numbers, “dyad” now defines numbers in that their “Identities” now seed
themselves in nothingness instead of a “center”… everything exist without a
center or nothingness has become God.